Research essay on Torture

Name: Instructor’s name: Course: Date: The Case for Torture Introduction This essay is an analysis on Levin’s article about the case of torture which majorly communicates that employing torture is important and justifiable at times mostly when it helps to protect many lives especially those that are innocent. In the example Michael Levin gives in his article “The Case for Torture”, he disagrees that the collective assassination of millions of guiltless citizens by a fanatic gives a good reason for the exercise of torture to bring such a tremendous barbaric action to an end. Without a doubt this is a subject of ethics on the deed of imposing pain. Taking for instance a research on the state of affairs of a conflict, at no point in time can it be said that it is unethical to free soldiers to exterminate or cause pain on the opponents in a battle since it is clear that it is the single approach to defend the sovereignty of the country and the life of citizens (Bagaric & Clarke 67). Topical argument on the subject of torture and cross-examination has laid focus on prescribed views in the office of authorized advocate for the duration of the administration by Bush. Interpreting the anti torture order scarcely; these views upheld replicated drowning, agonizing stress positions, comprehensive segregation, and condemning detainees into specially constructed walls, among other methods. These methods according to many constitute illegal torture, (Dreadful). The Controversy Framework Back dating to authors such as Beccaria and Voltaire debate has widely spread within a centuries old structure. According to historic example debates in opposition to torture put forward abstract entities-personal and countrywide identity, civilization, humanity, inherent value and the rule of law with complex internal structures. These entities are overlooked and then damaged by torture according to critics of torture. These qualities can be possessed by both the torturers and victims hence they are destroyed. Torture does not only assault victims but it also devastate torturers, own kindness (Rejali, 52). Critics argue that torture produces knowledge but actually is the information about the torturers character. A different ontology is employed by the other side of the debate. These opinions usually focus on physical survival or destruction and material things and not on abstractions. Both the torturers and victims have a complex internal life and those have are not mentioned. The focus is instead on singular events, which become subjects of calculation and measurement-if this bomb goes off, many people will die. It is said that a nation that uses torture threatens its own people. As mentioned the motives are very clear. Therefore, it is justified to let soldiers kill those who intend to harm the lives of other citizens. When a terrorists is caught with an intention to harm the lives of other millions citizens why then is it not justified to impose a little pain to protect majority? Actually it is going by this opinion. Everyone’s right is protected by the constitution and torturing means bleaching that right and hence torturing is unconstitutional (O’Hara, 68). However, it is only unconstitutional if only if its motives are reasonably immoral. Pain sho...